RTI and Good Governance- UPSC, IAS, Research Paper

A good and transparent governance can't be establish without RTI. In this article we are going to discuss about the importance of RTI in establishing a good and transparent governance in a democratic country. This article has been written by Ashutosh Nath, a student of  Symbiosis law School, Hyderabad. 

“RIGHT TO INFORMATION HAS STRENGTHENED TRANSPARENCY IN ADMINISTRATION- NEEDS AND CHALLENGES”

1)    INTRODUCTION

“Where a society has chosen to accept democracy as its creedal faith, it is elementary that the citizens ought to know what their government is doing.”

-Justice P N Bhagwati[i]

The human being is considered the shrewdest animal. According to French philosopher Michel Foucault, power and information are complementary and supplementary to each other.[ii] To substantiate this argument we can state that,  information increases knowledge and knowledge make the human being powerful. In this contemporary world, it's the basic human right of every individual to have information on everything. On the other hand, the deprivation of it will be considered as a violation of the human rights of an individual. Now in this present time, most of the countries have made the right to information as the fundamental right of their citizens'.[iii]

RTI is considered as the core element of a democratic country. Without RTI democracy is meaningless. In a democratic country, there is a close nexus between the RTI and “transparent administration”. This helps the people of a democratic country to live a dignified life. The is better to have a title of greatest democracy rather than  biggest democracy. A country like India can be named as the greatest democracy where its administrative system is transparent. In this context, we can say the RTI is one of the tools in making the administrative system more accountable and responsible. In a country like India RTI is considered as one of the fundamental rights under article 19 of the Indian constitution.  For the first time in the case of Bennett Coleman v. Union of India,[iv] the Hon’ble supreme court has made the RTI as a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian constitution. This right provides the right to public information, the right to express an opinion, and the right of receiving ideas from the public authorities.[v] 

PART-02 (MAIN BODY)

1.     CONCEPT OF RTI

In contemporary times, the Right to Information (RTI)is taken as one of the tools, which can measure the rate of growth and development of a democratic country.  Although India got its independence in 1947, until the year 2005, no citizens have the right to access information from any public authority. After the implementation of the Right to Information Act,2005, it became a fundamental right of every Indian citizen by which they can get access to any document through public authority smoothly. The real development of a democratic country happens, when its citizens get a chance to know a different aspect of his country. This development depends on the accessibility, which has been provided as a basic right to a common man to know about his/her country. After the commencement of such an act, the administrative system gets more transparent and accountable.

1.1)         OBJECTIVES OF RTI-

In the present time, the evil of corruption can be found in the social, political, and economical sectors. If corruption has been taken place through a process of administration or governance then it will amount to a crime. After the commencement of this act, it has controlled the corruption rate in the last 15 years. It has made the system more transparent and accountable. Meaning hereby the RTI Act,2005 has been implemented to eradicate the corruption from our country by using its tools i.e., “transparency and accountability”.[vi]

1.1.1)  IMPORTANT FEATURES OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT 2005

The “Right to Information Act,2005” contains different provisions relating to 1) independent appeals, 2) penalties for non-compliance, 3) proactive disclosure, and 4) clarity and simplicity of the access process. All the above-mentioned provisions have been mentioned hereinafter.

·         Information In a broader sense- The term Right to information has been defined in section 2(j) of the RTI Act,2005. As per this section, information is not restricted to any document or records. It also includes certified copies and any material information, which can be store in electronic devices under the control of any public authority.  Through the right to information, any citizen can inspect the work, and document as well as can demand a certified copy of any record or document. [vii]

·         Time limit- one applicant gets access to the information within 1 month (30 days) from the date of filing of an application.[viii]

·         Penalty- If an applicant has been prohibited from getting access from the requested information, then a penalty can be issued i.e.,250 rupees per day. Here it should be noted that the penalty should not exceed 25000 rupees. [ix]

·         Public information officers- Concerning this act a public information officers (POI) will be appointed in each of the units or administration, who can help the applicant in providing the requested information.[x]

·         Fee- The government should take a fee from the applicant, which should be reasonable. For the people who belong to BPL (Below Poverty Line), no fee will be taken.[xi]

1.2)         TRANSPARENCY-

In general, the meaning of the term transparency is being transparent or clean. when this term is being used in public administration then it indicates openness. Here the term openness means making the information available to the public, by public authority.[xii]

1.3)         ADMINISTRATION-

As per Merriam's, dictionary the term administration means the process of performing executive duties. On other hand, it can also be said that the implementations of the laws and execute public affairs are considered as administration. Although the system of administration can be founded in every sector, in this paper, the term Administration has been used for good governance.[xiii]

1)    THE NEXUS BETWEEN TRANSPARENCY AND GOOD ADMINISTRATION-

2.1)         THE NEED OF RTI FOR TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION-

The RTI, Act,2005 is considered one of the landmark steps in the history of the public administration of India. This step by the legislations gives a new dimension of development not only for the urban citizens but also for the rural citizens of India. It has innovated a faith in the mind of people for the working of the corruption-free government. By the implementation of RTI, delayed operations of government programs and the working methods of the government authorities have been overruled.[xiv]

The life of every human being cannot be improved without proper knowledge and information. Before the implementation of the RTI, the public authorities are not accountable and responsible for the society at large. On the other has it's also very valid to argue that every government should give information to its citizens regarding the implementations of governmental schemes and programs as he is proving financial support by the way of paying taxes. The methods by which we were being ruled for the last 6 decades, has been developed in the British Era. On the other hand, it is very much clear that to eradicate corruption from the system, secrecy in the administration has to be developed. It has been proved that the concept of secrecy is not only a way of creating corruption but also poverty.[xv]

2.2)         TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION AND RTI

·         Elements of transparent administration-

Every administration has been established with the motto of good governance. The term good governance has consisted of 4 elements. These elements are 1) Transparency 2) Accountability 3) Accessibility 4) Participation.[xvi]

The aforesaid elements give a sign of good and transparent administration. By implementing RTI in the system of working of an administration we can make it transparent and accountable.

·         Aim of RTI

Firstly, based on certain evidence, it has been founded that the government is more hunted by the evil of corruption, due to secrecy in the process of administration. On the other hand, openness makes government corruption-free. In simple words we can say, the RTI creates empowerment among the citizens of a state to fight against corruption to make their state corruption-free. This can make the government Transparent.[xvii]

Secondly, democracy has no meaning without RTI. It not only helps in fulfilling the aims of democracy but also strengths its foundations. By the implementation of RTI, the people can know about the aim and objective of the government, which can make the government accountable.

Thirdly, the administrative system cannot be effective, if the criticizes a state cannot participate in the process of administration. Meaning here by the process of administration should be citizen-centric and this can be happened by adopting the concept of participation in administration.

Fourthly, the administration of a particular government will be considered as effective when the easy accessibility of the information will be available to the public at large. This will develop the interest of the citizen in the process of administration as well as it will give the real taste of independence to its citizens.[xviii]

When we will compare the elements of good governance the aim and objective of a good administration, then we will be found that both of them are the two sides of the same coin. They are complementary and supplementary to each other. The real aim of a good administration cannot be established without the implementation of RTI. The aforesaid concept proves that there is a close nexus, which is existing between RTI and good governance.

2)    PRESENT STATUS OF RTI IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GOOD GOVERNANCE-

3.1) STATUS OF FUNCTIONING OF ADMINISTRATION IN INDIA. BEFORE AND AFTER IMPLEMENTATIONS OF RTI.

The main objective of this topic is to discuss the importance of RTI in making the administration transparent. The present status of development can be found, if a comparative study will be taken place between 2 periods i.e., before the implementation of RTI and after the implementation of RTI.  The aforesaid comparisons have been mentioned hereinafter.[xix]

Subjects	Before Implementation of RTI	After Implementation of RTI
Nature of public authorities and Staff	Staffs were careless about their duties.	The staff has become very active in their official work.
State of mind	Previously there was no fear in the mind of the public authorities. This makes them irresponsible.	RTI has made the public officials responsible, as there is the fear of punishment is there.
Duty of Public authority and staff members.	Previously the staffs were not punctual and duty-bound.	Now all the staffs are punctual and duty-bound.
Public Service	No proper action was not being taken by the public authority on the complaints made by the citizens.	Now the public authority is providing the results of the request within the specified time limit as it is a fundamental right.
Public Order and documents	Previously, none of the public authorities were maintaining the documents and records in a proper manner and order.	Every record and documents are being maintained by the authority in a proper manner and order.

(Source; RTI Fellowship Report: 2015)

3.2) CORRUPTION INDEX-

Transparency International is an organization that provides a report on corruption, which is known as the “Corruption Perception Index” (CPI). By analysing this report, we can get an idea of the corruption rate in India after the implementation of RTI. India’s ranking and scoring in corruption throughout the world among other countries can identify the rate of corruption in India. This rate can also be taken as a parameter to define whether the implementation of RTI has reduced the corruption rate or not.[xx]

YEAR	INDIA’S RANK	TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPATING COUNTRY	SCORES
2011	95	183	3.1
2012	94	176	3.6
2013	94	177	3.6
2014	85	175	3.8
2015	85	175	3.8
2019	80	180	4.0

(Source: Corruption Perception Index (CPI) reports[xxi].)

From the above-mentioned report, it is very much clear that the score of India is increasing year after year. It is one of the positive sighs towards transparent administration. Although the data of the past 5 years has been given in the table, but in the parent report the development in the scoring rate can be seen from 2005 onwards.  In the years 2005 and 2006 India scored 2.8 and 2.9 respectively. Similarly, the CPI report of 2019, it has been founded that has been put in the position of 80 among 180 countries. from the above-mentioned analysis, it has been proved that the implementations of RTI have reduced the rate of corruption in India.

3.3) INVOLVEMENT OF CITIZENS IN THE RTI

From the year 2005, it has been found that RTI has innovated curiosity in the mind of the citizens to know about the functioning of the government. Recently, in a report named “state transparency report, 2019” published by “Transparency International India”, it has been mentioned that 21.32 lakh applications have been filed for different accessibility of information in central and state commission.[xxii] From this report, the interest of citizens in the participation process of administration can be judged. It has also been founded that every year the number of applications is also increasing. The states which are making large numbers of application are Maharashtra, Tamilnadu, Kerala, and Karnataka respectively.[xxiii]

3)      CHALLENGES-

4.1) DELAY IN DISPOSAL OF CASES AND HUGE BACKLOG-

Although the right to information has already taken a prodigious role in making the administration transparent and accountable, after that also there is some lacuna in providing the service of RTI which is considered as a drawback in the process of making the administrative system successful. Recently a study has been conducted by the Centre for Equity Studies (CES) to know about the funding of RTI and its effects on the life of people. It has been founded that although the RTI plays an important role in making the lives of the citizen easy but on other hand, it has also been founded that, 1,81,852 applications are pending before different authorities. It creates a negative impression of RTI in the implementation process of good governance in a democratic country. A specific period which has mentioned in the act itself for the disclosure of documents for the public. Deprivation from the access of required document somehow going to violate the fundamental right of the applicants.

Reasons for Delay-

Due to some of the root reasons the aforesaid problem is happening in the present time. Some of the important reasons have been mentioned hereinafter.

·         The present numbers of information commission are not sufficient enough to handle all the filling applications at the centre level. This situation is making a delay in hearing the cases.

·         Although the record management system has been improved after the implementation of the RTI act,2005, but perfection has not been coming in it. so, it became the reason for the delay.

·         The specific period for the filling of the second application has not been mention in the RTI act. This has also become the sole reason for the delay in deciding the matters.

4.2) PUBLIC AWARENESS IN RURAL AREAS.

The RTI is of no meaning, if there is no public awareness regarding it. In the present time, many people are utilizing RTI as one of the fundamental rights. although the percent of the applicant has been increased a lot in the last 15 years, this percentage will look less whenever we are going to consider the population of our country. From research, it has been founded that public awareness about RTI in rural areas is very low. Among the ST, SC, and OBC groups this rate is extremely low. Here the question is if the citizens of a country do not know their rights, then how far they can utilize it.

Reason for law public awareness-

·         Education is the only tool that can be used to make them aware of their rights and duties. Lack of education in the rural areas depriving them to know about their basic fundamental right.

4.3) LOOPHOLES IN LAW-

Due to some of the loopholes in the legal provisions and legislations, the system of good administration is not able to be being transparent. This is because these loopholes are creating hurdles in the path of RTI to make the governance transparent. Some of the loopholes have mentioned hereinafter. This is the first task, which the government should take i.e., revising and reviewing some of the acts, which gives negative effects for the implementations of the RTI.[xxiv]

·         Official Secrets Act,1923[xxv]-

Section 5 of the official secrets act,1923 gives the power to the public authority to hide all official secrete information irrespective of the effects of its consequence of disclosure.

·         The Indian Evidence Act, 1872- [xxvi]

Section 123 of the Indian evidence act also creates a hurdle in the path of RTI in the implementation process of good governance. As per this section, no one can take the official unpublished work of the government as evidence. But there are circumstances where it can be taken as evidence when the permission of the head of the department has been granted for it. The court is also empowered to deny the unpublished government document as evidence.

·         Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules 1964.[xxvii]

In a report published by the Shourie Committee, it has been founded by the central civil service Rule 1964 applies to All India Services like (Railway Service, Administrative service, and Foreign Service), where the public servant can deny the public for giving any information. This is very much clear that the existing law should be changed if we need transparency in the process of administration.

 

·         RTI and Right to privacy a paradox-

In the real world of administration, it seems like a paradox as at the same time it is very difficult to draw a line between these two. Both the rights are regarded as fundamental rights as one of them comes under the preview of article 21 and, on the hand, the right to information comes under article 19(1) (a) of the Indian constitution.[xxviii] sometimes the right to information violates the “right to privacy” of a person.[xxix] Many of the times it has been seen that, RTI has mis utilize by some of the persons, which results in the violation of the right to privacy. Although both of the rights are very much important for every individual, but many of the time a clear line can’t be drawn between them.

5.4) DILUTION OF THE LAW-

Recently an amendment has been proposed in the legislation which is named as RTI (Amendment) Act,2019.[xxx] As per this bill, both the central and state commission has given the power to fix the term and conditions for the information commissioner. If the central or state government will be provided with such enormous powers, then that power can be hurdle in the path of RTI for the fulfilment of its objectives.[xxxi]

4)    JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS (CASE LAWS)-

As we all know RTI is considered as one of the fundamental rights of every Indian citizen which comes under the preview of article 19(1) (a) of the Indian constitution.[xxxii] So, for every unsolved problem, a citizen of Indian knock at the door of the court to protect his fundamental right. The judiciary has made the RTI more efficient and stronger in the Indian context by its different landmark judgments. From many of the decisions of the courts has been found that a good administration not be established without the implementation of RTI.[xxxiii] Some of the landmark decision has been mentioned hereinafter.

5.1) RTI AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT AND HUMAN RIGHT

1)      In the case of “S.P Gupta vs. Union of India”[xxxiv] all the public acts, public transactions, which come under the preview of the basic right of information were illustrated by the Apex court. Democracy is meaning less is the government is not accountable and transparent. The people should have information about every work which has been conducted by the government.

2)      In the case of “Bennett Coleman v. Union of India” [xxxv], the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India included RTI as one of the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) of the Indian constitution. As per this judgment the “Right of Freedom of speech and expression” has been included under “right to information”.

3)      In the case of “Secretary, Ministry of I&B, Government of India v Cricket Association of Bengal”[xxxvi] the court has held that collecting and sending information through the process of electronic media will also come under the preview of freedom of speech.

4)      In the case of the “Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India,”[xxxvii] the court has held that the RTI is not only restricted as a fundamental right but also it is a basic human right, which should be enjoyed by every human being.

5)      In the case of “S.P Gupta vs. Union of India”[xxxviii] all the public acts, public transactions, which come under the preview of the basic right of information were illustrated by the Apex court. Democracy is meaning less is the government is not accountable and transparent.

5.2) RTI AND TRANSPARENT ADMINISTATIONS

6)      In the case of “State of UP v. Raj Narain”[xxxix], it has been held that the government should protect the interest of the public by answering and explain the queries made by the citizen through their public authority.

7)      In the case of “Shyam Yadav V. Department of Personnel Training”,[xl] the court has held that the statement of property which has been filed by the civil servants are not confidential. The information can be published after taking the views of the respective officials concerning the provisions of the RTI act.

8)      In the case of “Ram Bhaj v. Delhi Government”[xli], the appellant has requested certain guidelines for some time for the hearing of the public grievance process. In this case, the CIC directed the Delhi government to give certain guidelines regarding the time frame for filing a second appeal.

9)      “M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd vs Radhey Shyam Sahu And Others”[xlii] some of the land acquisition has been conducted in the name of the government and after that it has been used for commercial purposes.  In this case the court held that this act is not a sigh of good governance.

10)   “Lily Thomas Vs Union of India”[xliii], in this case the court has held that in the concept of right to vote, a citizen of India has the right that he can exercise it either in the favour of the motion or against it.

PART-03

 (CONCLUSION)

1.     FINDINGS-

This research has been conducted to find the answers to the research questions. These findings are considered as the outcomes of the research. The findings of this research have been mentioned hereinafter.

Positive Side-

·         Democracy is meaningless without RTI.

·         The RTI takes a prominent role to make the administrative system responsible, accountable, and transparent.

·         After the implementation of RTI, a great change has come in the system of administration. Up to a certain extent, RTI is successful in making the system corruption free and has also made the life of the citizens simpler.

·         The involvement of public with the system of administration are increasing day by day.

Negative Side-

·         Many of the times RTI has been mis utilizes by the whistle-blowers.

·         Lack of educations and awareness among the marginal group depriving them of easy access to RTI.

·         Loopholes in some of the other acts (IEA, the official secrecy Act) creating hurdles in achieving the real aim of RTI.

2.     CONCLUSION

To conclude, we can say India is considered the largest democracy in the world but not the greatest one. To become the greatest democracy of the world, it has to make its system of administration more effective and transparent. Although RTI has taken a great role in making the administrative system transparent and accountable but due to some of the loopholes and shortcomings in the implementation of RTI, it has not achieved its goal yet. One single act cannot change the whole system. To make the system more effective, we also have to focus on the loophole, which is prevailing in other acts. Lack of interest has been found in the political leaders and the bureaucrats. This is creating hurdles in rectifying the loopholes. Some of the changes are required to achieve the real fruit for which the seed of RTI had been planted. Some of the way forward steps had been given as suggestions, which are considered as the need of the hour. The aim of RTI can be achieved in the process of administration by implementing such suggestions.

3.      SUGGESTIONS-

·         Lack of education makes the process more difficult. So, a simpler way should be followed in the filling process of RTI. Many of the time a common citizen suffers a lot with the technicalities while applying for any information.

·         The rate of disposal of applications is very low. Day by day the number of pending applications is increasing. Both the central and the state information commission should take immediate steps for providing immediate results for the pending applications.

·         RTI takes a prominent role not only for the implementation of good governance but also for development in a democratic country. So, it is very much important to create awareness among the uneducated people about their basic rights, by which they can participate in the developing process of the country. More education and awareness can make it happened. The NGOs should take a prominent role to create awareness among the marginal people of the country.

·         The Judiciary should be work as a watchdog, by which RTI cannot be mis utilize by other organs. It is because many of the time it has been seen that the Whistle Blower are attacking and mis-utilizing the system of administration.

·         A proper balance should be maintained between the Right to information and the Right to privacy. The legislation should come off with a new law where a line can be drawn between these.

·         An open data policy system should be implemented by the respective government. As per this both the departments of the central and the state government should be put all the data on their official website by which a common man accesses the data as per his/her need.

·         As per the recommendations of the second ARC report, the official secrets act,1923 should be replaced by any other action as it is creating some of the challenges in achieving the aim of the RTI.

·         The aforesaid section of “The official secrecy Act” “Indian Evidence Act,1872” and the Civil Servile Act, rule11 should be cross-checked by the judiciary in light of the right to information.

---

REFERENCE

[i] Justice P N Bhagwati( Former Chief Justice of India)- Mentioned in the case of – Sp Gupta vs President of India- (AIR 1982 SC 149, Para-66)”

[ii] Segev Elad, “Volume and control: the transition from information to power”. Journal of Multicultural Discourses (2013). 14 (3): 240–257. 

[iii] Bennett Coleman v. Union of India, AIR 1973 SC 106 (India)

[iv] Bennett Coleman v. Union of India, AIR 1973 SC 106 (India)

[v] India Const.art.19, cl.1 (a).      

[vi] Dr. Sheila Rai, “Transparency and Accountability in Governance and Right to Information in India”Semantic Scholar Publication-(2009), 65-76.

[vii] Right to Information Act-2005, $2(f)

[viii] Right to Information Act-2005, $27

[ix] Right to Information Act-2005, $2O (1)

[x] Right to Information Act-2005, $ 2(h)

[xi] Right to Information Act-2005, $17

[xii] Replevin, Black's Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014).

[xiii] Replevin, Merriam, dictionary (8th ed. 2020).

[xiv]“Transparency and Open Government: Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies” 74 Fed. Reg.4685 (Jan. 21, 2009) USA.

[xv] Dr. J.N Pandey, The Constitutional Law of India, Central Law Agency, (46th Edition, 2009)

[xvi] Dr. Sheila Rai, “Transparency and Accountability in Governance and Right to Information in India”Semantic scholar publication,(2009)

[xvii] Roy, Aruna, Dey Nikhil and Sh. anker Singh, “Demanding Accountability” Seminar, April, New Delhi. (2009)

[xviii] Iyer V.R. Krishna, “Freedom of Information: Fundamental to Fundamental Rights”, Popular Jurist, (2018)

[xix] Corruption Perception Index (CPI) reports,2019. (Available at)- https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2019

[xx] Dharanesha St, “Implementation of Right to Information and Impact on Administration”, Department of personal training under the ministry of personnel Public Grievances and Pensions, vol-01, pp-19-21

[xxi] Corruption Perception Index (CPI) reports,2019-available at- https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2019

[xxii] State Transparency Report, 2019 (available at-) https://transparencyindia.org/state-transparency-report/

[xxiii] Anshu Jain, “Good Governance and Right to Information: A Perspective” Journal of the Indian Law Institute, (2012) (Vol. 54, No. 4 pp. 506-519)

[xxiv] O. P. Kejriwal, “Loopholes and Road Ahead” Economic and Political Weekly, (2006) (Vol. 41, No. 11.) 940-941

[xxv] The Official Secrets Act,1923 $ 5

[xxvi] The Indian Evidence Act,1872 $ 123

[xxvii] The Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules 1964. $ 11

[xxviii] INDIAN CONST art.$ 14, $ 19

[xxix] INDIAN CONST art. $ 14, $ 21

[xxx] RTI Act (Amendment) Act,2019 Bill. (proposed in Lok Sabha)

[xxxi] 1st Report Second Administrative Reforms Commission- June 2006 (available at) -http://arc.gov.in/rtifinalreport.pdf

[xxxii] INDIAN CONST art. $ 19

[xxxiii] Sahina Mumtaz, “Importance Of Right To Information For Good Governance In India” Laskar Bharati Law Review, Oct-Dec, 2016

[xxxiv] S.P Gupta vs. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149 India)

[xxxv] Bennett Coleman v. Union of India, AIR 1973 SC 106 (India)

[xxxvi] Secretary, Ministry of I&B, Government of India v Cricket Association of Bengal,1995(002) SCC 0161 SC

[xxxvii][xxxvii]  People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India, 2003(001) SCW 2353 SC India)

[xxxviii] S.P Gupta vs. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149 India)

[xxxix] State of UP v. Raj Narain, 1975 (004) SCC 0428 SC (India)

[xl] Shyam Yadav V. Department of Personnel Training, CIC/WB/A/2009/000669, 17/6/2009). (India)

[xli] Ram Bhaj v. Delhi Government, (CIC/SG/A/2010/000537+000538/7492, 19/4/2010). (India)

[xlii] “M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd vs Radhey Shyam Sahu And Others” AIR 1999 SC 2468.

[xliii] “Lily Thomas Vs Union of India” (2000) 6 SCC 224